Aquanest Biotic for Fish, Reef Aquariums, and Pet Birds
www.aquanestbiotic.com is a manufacturing and distribution company specializing in fish, reef aquarium, and pet bird’s antibiotics. We sell the antibiotics in capsule form versus tablet form like some of our competitors; this is important because that requires binders to hold the tablets together, polluting aquariums, or introducing extra unnecessary chemicals to your pet. Our antibiotics are the same ones that humans take, and they work when used by fish and birds. However, we cannot condone or suggest human consumption of our antibiotics due to FDA restrictions and regulations.
Why We Recommend You to Use the Right Antibiotics
Antibiotics are useful health tools for your fish, reef aquariums, and pet birds. They help eliminate their diseases in cases where:
– The problem has a bacterial component
– The bacteria are sensitive to our antibiotics
– The right dosage and treatment are used.
– There is another stress inhibitor that has been reduced or removed.
Our antibiotics help control the population growth of bacteria in your pet bird, fish, or aquarium reef. However, before you administer antibiotics, we suggest testing the water quality of your aquarium, nutrition of your pets, and any other outside factors. We also suggest examination to determine the possible presence of parasites in your fish, birds, and aquarium reef to find out the main cause of their disease and administer the right antibiotics when needed.
Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Bacteria Antibiotic
Our antibiotics treat both gram-positive and negative bacteria. To find out if your fish, pet birds, and aquarium reef have either of the bacteria, you can carry out a gram staining test whereby gram-positive turns blue, and gram negative one turns pink. The two stain the test differently because of their different wall structure. Having done so many fish bacteria tests ourselves, we found out that most fish possess gram-negative bacteria such as Pseudomonas species, Aeromonas hydrophila, and Flavobacterium columnare. Therefore, we have specialized a lot in the production of antibiotics that are gram negative.
Main Approach to Fighting Bacteria Infection
Most bacteria causing disease in fish and aquatic reefs live in the water. When a single or more factor stresses your fish, its immune system is put to the test and is more prone to infections.
How then do you approach the infection?
We recommend you to work with a fish health professional to culture the organism and conduct sensitivity tests. The specialist will grow the bacteria in question on a unique media such as gelatin and then treat the bacteria with our antibiotics until they determine the suitable antibiotics to be used.
Correct Dosages and Treatment Plans
Aquanest Biotic ensures that we choose the right antibiotic for your fish, pet bird, or aquarium reef. We understand that this is a crucial step in controlling the bacterial infection, and proper administration of an antibiotic for days is crucial. We provide you detailed instructions on dosages, frequency, and duration, and withdrawal time.
www.aquanestbiotic.com is the right company for all of your reef aquarium, fish, and pet bird bacteria problems. We provide you with the best quality antibiotics that will work effectively. Visit our website today, and let us know how we can help.
Human Consumption of Fish Antibiotics
Fish and birds are given many of the same antibiotic capsules as humans: ciprofloxacin, Amoxicillin, penicillin, and many more; sometimes, it involves even the same dosage and packaging.
While these drugs are usually identical in every way to those meant for humans, the FDA does not approve, nor do we condone the use of fish antibiotics like we here at Aquanest Biotic sell for human consumption. While a person may fear taking a trip to the doctor, which might prove expensive to those without insurance coverage, a bottle of Fish Amoxi capsules costs roughly $19.95 to purchase.
Some “preppers” and survivalists will stock up on fish antibiotics in case a doomsday or catastrophic event occurs. While some doctors like Dr. Ryan Chamberlin and the Patriot Nurse (YouTube name) recommend these drugs, be cautious only to use them when you have no alternative. But before you stock up on fish antibiotics, be advised that we here at Aquanest Biotic do not condone it, and you do so at your own risk
Why are fish and pet antibiotics considered?
Preparing for the possibility of a “doomsday” end of the world moments, or otherwise catastrophic global event, preppers theorize they will not have access to doctors and medications, especially antibiotics. Therefore, preppers are stockpiling pet and fish antibiotics if they or their loved ones get injured or sick and lack proper antibiotics. Furthermore, in less than ideal conditions, a simple cut might lead to one dying; in contrast, fish antibiotics can save lives. Thus, many preppers think that pet and fish antibiotics can come as the last option to have access to medication and prevent loss of life when you take other fish or pet drugs that cure the same infection.
Some of the Fish Antibiotics that Preppers Stockpile
Concurrently, some drugs perform the same action as those recommended by doctors. Here are the drugs:
All in all, this drug is the most sought-after in survival medication. From the World Health Organization, it is stated among essential medicines. Doxycycline treats most of the infectious diseases that arise from major disasters. From lung infections to sinus problems, the antibiotic will take care of it. Certainly, Doxycycline cannot be taken when pregnant and can cause sunburn when used more often.
These drugs work best to treat bronchitis or pneumonia, prostrate infections, urinary tract bacterial infections, and several other infections that affect the intestines and many other bacterial infections. For the past years, the drug has not been used in children due to joint problems, but it is currently used in small doses.
Azithromycin is used to treat many different types of infections caused by bacteria, such as respiratory infections, skin infections, ear infections, and sexually transmitted diseases. Azithromycin treats respiratory and a variety of other infections preppers can expect to face during catastrophes. These include, but are not limited to: Sinusitis, Bronchitis, Pneumonia, Syphilis, Typhoid, Chlamydia, Lyme Disease, and PID. Possible and common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, & abdominal pain – all of which are usually mild and rare. In 2013, the FDA released a warning about possible fatal cardiac arrhythmias associated with taking Azithromycin. While many antibiotics carry this same type of risk, the FDA warned that there would be an extra 47 heart-related deaths per one million courses of treatment with five days of Zithromax, as compared to 10 days of amoxicillin and other antibiotics. This is probably not of much concern to Preppers, unless they have a preexisting heart condition.
Similar to Amoxicillin & Cephalexin, Erythromycin is also used to treat most respiratory infections – including walking pneumonia – as well as middle ear and some skin infections. Particularly useful is its ability to treat Lyme Disease and STI’s like Chlamydia. It’s safe for children and pregnant women. Erythromycin is similar to Azithromycin, but is taken twice a day instead of once a day, and has a little higher incidence of GI disturbance including: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain. Erythromycin belongs in a group of drugs called macrolide antibiotics. Macrolide antibiotics slow the growth of, or sometimes kill, sensitive bacteria by reducing the production of important proteins needed by the bacteria to survive. Erythromycin is used to treat or prevent many different types of infections caused by bacteria.
Again, we here at Aquanest Biotic DO NOT recommend, suggest or condone the use of our product by humans or other animals besides fish and birds. The FDA does not condone or suggest the use of fish antibiotics. You should never self diagnose, and should seek a doctor or physicians care for any medical treatments or advice.
Here’s an excellent writeup from www.reeftoreef.com from user Aquabiomics on the use of Ciprofloxacin (Fish Cip 250mg & Fish Cip 500mg) to eliminate and treat the dreaded Brown Jelly Disease (BJD) on Euphyllia. BJD is one of a reefer’s worst nightmares, and up until recently they knew little about it’s causes or how to treat it. Through trial and error and experimentation, it’s found that Ciprofloxacin may be the ticket to battling BJD. You can find Ciprofloxacin from www.AquanestBiotic.com HERE (for 250mg) and HERE (for 500mg)
Brown Jelly Disease (BJD) is an issue many reefers have run into. Like most coral diseases, the pathogen causing BJD has not been conclusively determined. Here I will share some observations and test results supporting the idea that its caused by a bacterial pathogen, and so may be treatable with antibiotics.
I’m sure this is not the first time someone’s tried antibiotics against BJD, but I havent previously come across a DNA based study of the results. This is a preliminary investigation based on observations made on my home tanks spanning a few months. It is not conclusive, and is not intended to put the discussion to rest; far from it. It’s just another piece of the puzzle as we figure out how to deal with this disease.
Overall my finding suggest that:
- Infection with a specific bacterium in the genus Arcobacter contributes to BJD.
- This infection can be safely treated in the aquarium with low doses of a commonly used aquarium antibiotic.
- This treatment doesn’t appear to damage the microbial community, but may actually improve it.
Here is the story, including the single case study so far of a tank treated in this way.
A Specific Bacterium Associated with Brown Jelly Disease
Over the last 6 months I’ve seen several cases where newly imported Euphyllia developed Brown Jelly Disease shortly after I received them. It had all the signs of an infectious disease. A newly imported colony would dissolve in BJD, and several other frags Euphyllia in the tank would also develop BJD if I didn’t remove the affected corals quickly enough.
These corals aren’t cheap, so my instinct was initially to try to save them (with no success) rather than conduct experiments. But after losing a few Euphyllia from different orders and suppliers my curiosity got the better of me. So the next two corals that developed early signs of BJD (a Hammer Coral E. ancora, and a Grape Coral E. cristata), I let it develop. Once they were in full-blown BJD, I sacrificed and sampled them.
Both of these samples were dominated by a single type, an unclassified bacterium in the genus Arcobacter. To clarify what I mean by that: this is a type that has been seen before, it’s a perfect match to a sequence record in public DNA sequence databases. But, like so many microbes found in environmental samples, the species has not been formally described and named.
Identifying it to the genus can be pretty useful, though. The genus Arcobacter includes several known pathogens of humans and other animals, including A. butzleri, which is a food-borne pathogen that presents a serious risk to human health. When you sequence samples of two different diseased corals, and find them both dominated by a genus known to contain pathogens, it’s worth noting.
It also gives us a good guess at the likely physical description and lifestyle. These are rod-shaped to helical, non-spore forming, and swim in a corkscrew motion using their single flagellum. These occur in association with animals, and also free living in waste water, seawater, and other aquatic habitats.
This information can also be useful in developing treatment strategies, since the members of a Bacterial genus often share characteristic sensitivities to the same antibiotics. We’ll get to that.
Infecting a Euphyllia Garden with BJD
Who would intentionally do such a thing?? Not me.
What happened was this. I continued to buy Euphyllia, a fraction of them continued to develop BJD, and I was experimenting with short antibiotic dips. (This approach never yielded much success for me, but there is more work to be done on that front. )
Then one batch of especially nice corals started to BJD within 24 hours after arrival, and I panicked. I decided my Frag Tank must have the BJD pathogen, and I needed to get them out of it. I triaged the new corals, sacrificing the worst cases and transferring a couple that I thought were clean into a different tank… my Euphyllia Display Tank.
This was not my smartest move ever. They were so pretty, I acted irrationally
Next thing you know, both of the new Euphyllia and 4 of my existing Euphyllia in the tank were showing early signs of stress. They all showed oddly deflated tentacles that were not fully extended, and I could the beginnings of some of the characteristic Brown Jelly stuff on the two new corals. I removed these plaguebearers, pretty though they were, from the tank.
So I sampled the water at this point… after introducing the new corals, at the earliest signs of stress. What I found: exactly the same bug (Acrobacter sp., sv1103) at unusually high levels. I found 92 sequences matching this perfectly, representing >1% of the total community. (These were never found in biofilm samples, this analysis is based only on water samples)
Treating BJD with antibiotics, in the aquarium
What to do? I could remove all the Euphyllia and try a dip, but I hadn’t been having much success with dips. So I looked at the tank and realized, the only corals I cared about in this tank were the Euphyllia. Fish are easy to move to another tank if something goes wrong, I have plenty of tanks running with room for a fish or two.
So I decided to take the plunge and treat my whole tank with the antibiotic. Although it’s often repeated on the internet that adding antibiotics to your tank will kill the good bacteria, I hadn’t seen any evidence of that.
Meanwhile I had evidence an Arcobacter species was associated with BJD, published reports of the antibiotic sensitivity of these bugs, and a tank full of Euphyllia on the verge of succumbing to BJD. So I dosed the tank.
I chose Ciprofloxacin because it is effective at the lowest doses, reasoning that in this way, I could minimize collateral damage. I based this decision on this study because it had a nice comparison of dosage trials for a wide range of antibiotic; I saw several other studies that also supported the use of Ciprofloxacin to treat Arcobacter infections.
I used Ciprofloxacin at 0.125 mg / L. To achieve this I dissolved a 500 mg pill in 50 ml of RODI water, producing a 10 mg / ml solution (which I subsequently stored in the fridge). The aquarium system has 70 gal volume altogether (~265 L), so I added 3.3 ml of this solution to achieve 0.125 mg / L. I repeated this dose every 2 days for 3 doses altogether.
Within 24 hours of the first dose, all of the affected corals showed signs of improvement. Their tentacles inflated again, although the remained not full extended. Within 48 hours they were fully extended and looked perfectly healthy again.
A few days after the final dose, I sampled the aquarium again. Like samples taken from the same aquarium a month prior to introducing the diseased Euphyllia, Arcobacter sp. (sv1103) was again not detected. Introducing the diseased animals introduced the bacterium, and the antibiotic treatment appears to have knocked their populations down substantially.
I should emphasize that since there are no controls, or photographs, for the effects of this treatment on the corals it’s entirely possible they simply got better on their own. We can have a little more confidence in the effects of the treatment on the Arcobacter themselves, though. Here we have a measurement of the effect, although not replicated in multiple tanks.
In a future experiment I will address both issues — this was an experimental trial born of desperation.
But doesn’t that kill the good bacteria too?
This is of course a reasonable concern. There’s a wide range of views on how to achieve the right microbial community, and how much the various parts of the community even matter. But I think few experienced reefers would say the bacterial community doesnt matter at all. So it makes sense to be cautious about adding antibiotics to the tank and potentially killing off whatever parts of the community you think are important.
But of course the dose makes the poison, and remember that I chose this antibiotic specifically because it was effective against this genus at the lowest dosage of any antibiotics tested.
The system has a moderate bioload with 4 fish in a 40 gallon DT with 30 gallons of sump volume, along with a bunch of corals. There is no algal refugium or macroalgae. So if the nitrifying community were to die, I would expect to see an explosion in nutrients and algal growth. This didnt happen. (I confess, I didnt measure nutrients this time around. I base this conclusion on the lack of algal growth that would be fueled by a rise in nutrients)
More directly, I compared the aquarium microbiome before and after the treatment. Here’s a table summarizing the major stats we look at in comparing aquarium microbial communities:
|Diversity Score (percentile)||552 (91st)||438 (69th)||532 (87th)|
|Balance Score (percentile)||0.5 (76th)||0.18 (50th)||0.51 (83rd)|
|Ammonia-oxidizing microbes (%)||Present (5.5%)||Present (2.3%)||Present (0.9%)|
|Nitrite-oxidizing bacteria (%)||Present (0.08%)||Not detected||Present (0.05%)|
Did the treatment damage the microbial community? Not at all. If it had any effect at all, it was to restore the community to its previous state by selectively knocking out a few susceptible bacteria.
If all a person cares about is the nitrifying community, that was not removed. There was a slight decrease in AOM while NOB were restored from undetectable to a more typical level.
If a person is interested in the microbial functions of the community more broadly, the summary statistics of Diversity and Balance scores were also improved by the treatment rather than harmed. The introduction of diseased corals lowered both scores, and the antibiotic treatment increased both scores.
This point about the broader microbial community can be illustrated most easily with a barplot showing the community over time. In these plots, each color represents a different microbial family.
The figure shows that the microbial community was fairly typical before BJD, became atypical during BJD, and was restored to something like its previous state following the antibiotic treatment.
A skeptical reader may point out that since there are no replicates here, we can’t be confident attributing the changes to the treatment. It could be coincidence. Perhaps the corals recovered on their own and the microbial community resumed its previous structure after a transient disturbance caused by adding diseased corals. Based on my previous efforts to save Euphyllia with BJD I find this a little unlikely, but certainly not impossible.
Ultimately that objection would be correct and in the future I will do a properly replicated experiment to test this. What I’ve shown here is a just hypothesis with some preliminary evidence supporting it.
How Common is this Bacterium in Saltwater Aquaria?
In a set of 148 aquariums I’ve sampled (this is not the entire database, its the “high quality” database made up of normal, healthy tanks with good sequencing coverage), Arcobacter sp. sv1103 is not detectable in a majority of tanks.
We can express this same idea a few different ways. For the majority oftanks, this sequence was not detected at all (80%). For nearly all tanks (95%), this bacterium was absent or extremely rare (<0.00006%).
This context makes the comparison with my BJD infected tank even more stark. That 1.2% is huge in comparison with the typical levels observed across a large number of aquaria.
Based on what I’ve reported here, I hypothesize that infections with Arcobacter sp. (sv 1103) contribute to Brown Jelly Disease in LPS corals, and that these infections can be safely and effectively treated in the aquarium with low doses of Ciprofloxacin. Depending on the results of further tests, this could be a useful tool for the hobbyist community in the fight against BJD.
Important disclaimer: if anyone reading this feels inspired to treat their own tank, I specifically take no responsibility for the results. This is an experimental treatment, and if you run experiments on your own tank you take all the responsibility for the results.
But I know some of you, like me, enjoy running experiments on your own tanks. Many of us have a bottle of Cipro sitting around. And anybody who keeps Euphyllia is likely to encounter BJD at some point. Anybody want to test this? I’ll throw in the microbiome testing before and after if so…
Thanks for reading and may your tanks stay free of Brown Jelly!